1  

Saint Michael & All Angels Barnes

AWAY DAY 2017 PCC and Guests

At St Mary’s Convent, Chiswick

Theme: ‘Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations’ Matthew 28.19

SUMMARY REPORT

  2  

Introduction: What is the Away Day? The away day is a time of prayer, fellowship, study and reflection when the PCC step outside the normal context of parish to think differently, to think big ideas, and to open hearts and minds to what God is calling us as a church to do. It is not a day when big decisions are made, but is an opportunity to ground thinking in a wider context and a greater depth, so that later decisions and actions are properly informed. The theme of this year’s Away Day came from the conclusion of Matthew’s Gospel known as ‘The Great Commission’ and reflects the day’s focus on thinking about mission in general and in context, as we prepare for a new project for our Church Hall. The first part of the timetable was involved reflection about mission founded on the scriptures and in our spiritual lives, and then moved on to thinking about the mission we were already undertaking. This led naturally into a session about how a new project could potentially further and develop what we were are already doing as much as anything new we might undertake. The second part of the day was aimed at bringing together a wide range of information on areas that are relevant to the new project in order to help us see the landscape and contours of the whole situation rather than isolated parts of it. Different PCC members had been given the task of gathering information on diverse areas sometimes through new research, and sometimes by summarising material we already have. We were pleased to be joined for this half of the Away Day by representatives from the local community, immediate neighbours, the congregation and also users of the Church Hall, some of whom fell into more than one of these categories. Much of the afternoon was facilitated by the Rev’d Elisabeth Morse, for which St Michael’s is grateful. In this way we were able to share insights and views, listening and working together in a new way. Participants Frederick Appleby Lucy Barnes Andrew Barnsley Jane Bennett-Powell John Brocklebank Andrew Childs Deborah Goldberg Lizzie Hackett-Brown Harry Hobson Rosemary Hurry Phil Keightley Charlie Law The Rev’d Elisabeth Morse Sarah Poland Denise Poulton Andy Pudifoot The Rev’d Judith Roberts

Jacqueline Russell Father Richard Sewell Eleanor Stanier Father Stephen Stavrou Katharine Vile Apologies Jamie/Maddie Adams Charmian Goldwyn Miranda Ibbetson Steven Mindel David/Pam Palairat Laurence Zage Fanny Ward Audra Woods Caroline Bull Marion Kreling

Italics indicate afternoon guests.

Matthew 28.16-end ‘Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. When they saw him, they worshipped him; but some doubted. And Jesus came and said to them, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.’

  3  

Session 1: Opening Session

a)   Gathering in the St John Room we began by asking ourselves a question: ‘What are the best things in our church life at the moment?’

•   Change and renewal •   150th anniversary programme (e.g. concert, art show) •   Our Director of Music •   Our Vicar •   Our spiritual life, holiness experienced in worship. •   The increase in number of services. •   The artistry and enthusiasm (e.g. Anniversary mugs) •   Community e.g. Baptisms, marriages and other pastoral services. •   The Away Day •   People at church (friends) •   Zimbabwe Diocesan Link •   11.30am Children’s Mass and playing piano for it.

The range of responses reflected different areas of church life that PCC members are involved in but also the breadth and variety of what takes place at St Michael’s.

b)   We reprised our Away Day ‘Rules’ from last year to see if they were still relevant or if we wanted to change or add anything. The PCC agreed them again.

•   Open minds •   Openness (honesty) •   Respect difference (‘challenge the view not the person’) •   Challenge each other •   Confidentiality – defined as importance of safe space to speak honestly without words being reported

out of context of attributed personally, while also feeding back widely on the day.

c)   We briefly discussed our hopes and expectations for the day. These included: •   Some outcomes … (possibly) •   Some sharing … •   An understanding of where we were on the process timeline •   The importance of the afternoon share back time.

  4  

Session 2: Mass and Bible Study Moving to the beautiful convent chapel we celebrated the Eucharist together with the special intention of praying for our church and its parish. During the Mass we heard the Gospel of the Great Commission, and after a short reflection from Fr Stephen, the PCC were invited to reflect on the question ‘What is mission?’ using the aid of three images: The Sower, Sunflowers and Stepping Stones.

We captured our reflections thus:

  5  

Session 3: Mission in Context Returning to the St John room, and with this grounding in mission in the Bible, we then sought to ask ourselves two further questions, first: What mission are we already undertaking?

•   Our work with a variety of schools and nurseries (Barnes Primary, Harrodian, Pavillion Montessori, St Michael’s Nursery, St Paul’s, Paddock).

•   Our worship •   The variety, type and flexibility of services. •   Social and music events •   Open church (parish office in church) •   Communications (newsleters, emails, letters, social media etc) •   FiSH events. •   Community Centre hiring •   Baptism Families Party •   Cloister Carols •   Public processions •   Cloister events •   Charities we support •   Parish Support Fund (the money we give to the diocese)

There was much more that could be added! As part of the exercise we had the insight that the issue of the Church Hall had, paradoxically, made many people aware and engaged with St Michael’s who were not so before! This had the potential to be something positive with a new project.

We then asked ourselves our second questions: How might our Church Hall project further contribute to our mission, existing or potential? We had this discussion in the light of a number of other important pieces of input including:

i.   Our Mission Actions Plan (so far … ) ii.   Our ‘Grounding Principles’ for a new project iii.   The Anglican Communion’s 5 marks of mission iv.   Our Mission, Vision and Values statements.

  6  

Please see over

  7  

With all these things in mind we reflected that a new project could help our mission by …

•   providing an enriching educational resource •   increasing opportunities to strengthen links with nursery school •   assisting with the ‘community project’ described in the MAP. •   assisting with the ‘children’ aspect of the MAP •   being a social centre with services for the whole community. •   Enhancing community wellbeing and social care (e.g. sport, healthy eating) •   generating further income for the mission of the church •   being a more flexible space •   being a more comfortable space •   having better facilities •   broadening the age range and profile of our congregation •   attracting a wider mix of people. •   Supporting a staff member financially or through accommodation.

The exercise revealed the wide range of possibilities and potential for the project, many/most of which would sit comfortably alongside with existing uses and users depending on how they were conceived or implemented. At this point it was time for lunch, and welcome of our afternoon guests. After lunch we did a quick round of introductions and re-capped what had taken place in the morning.

  8  

Session 4: information task groups feedback The main part of the afternoon was taken up in hearing back from various task groups with information that had been gathered which might be relevant in some way to the future development of a new project. The intention was to receive a whole ‘palette’ of information that would provide an overview. The six groups were:

1.   Other Church Hall projects. 2.   Needs of the community, including social needs. 3.   Church Halls and nursery facilities. 4.   Issues with fabric and facilities. 5.   Planning constraints and guidance. 6.   Fundraising and funder options.

Introduction to the session The session was facilitated by the Rev’d Elisabeth Morse. Elisabeth introduced herself saying that she was a resident of Elm Bank Gardens (for 39 years), currently interim minister as St Richard’s Ham and until 2016 a vicar in Clapham. She discussed how own Church Hall had: 2 nursery schools Scouts, Guides, Brownies, Cubs and Rainbows ballet, karate, Gamblers Anonymous, Dementia café, drama group for autistic children, 2 choirs a free playgroup for local Mums and toddlers birthday parties, occasional wedding receptions, bible study groups, a meeting place for neighbourhood associations and action groups AND a night shelter for the homeless! Elisabeth described this as important context for the input of this afternoon. Church halls have the potential for a multiplicity of uses and it is a church’s responsibility to get the most out of them

-   To serve the mission of God -   to serve the needs of the local community -   to make some money so that they can serve wider charitable needs and the worship of

the church. None of these are mutually exclusive!

Prayer We spend a short time in reflective quiet prayer, as Elisabeth led a meditation about the breath of God bringing about creation, inspiration and insight, and connecting this with our own breathing: ‘breathe on us breath of God, fill us with life anew; that we may love as you love and do what thou wouldst do. Amen.

  9  

1.   Other Church Hall projects Eleanor Stanier and Andy Puddifoot began by reminding us that each project was contextual and related to the space and particular church, nevertheless there were some interesting ideas and information that had been gathered that might help us. They had looked at the 7 church halls on the chart below and 3 key points had emerged:

•   All church halls were hugely used in a variety of ways •   But there were similarities of usage. •   It is difficult to compare as each one is different

More detail was to be gathered on projects that were more relevant/comparable.

2.   Needs of the community (including social needs) Harry Hobson and Phil Keightley had taken a borough wide-approach and through conversations with the local council had been made aware of a number of needs:

•   There is an ageing population and this crisis is in need of resourcing. •   Shrinking council budgets have led to a movement of services away from Barnes and therefore difficulty of

access. •   The relative affluence of Richmond means that the poverty and social need that exist are not well served

and can be hidden. •   Problems include homelessness, drink, drugs and mental health – many of these affecting affluent middle-class

people as much as less well off residents.

  10  

There was more work to be done in exploring with local organisations such as FiSH and the Barnes Workhouse Fund what they were experiencing in Barnes at the moment.

3.   Church Hall and Nursery Facilities As Elisabeth had observed, many (if not most) church halls have nurseries in them, and in addition there are other local nurseries, and Lucy Barnes along with Frederick Appleby and Jacqueline Russell had been given the role of looking at facilities for nurseries whether in church halls or otherwise and how these might appropriately be incorporated into the project. The diagram below shows the key points:

Fr Stephen had met with Deborah Goldberg and together they had identified 5 key factors for her:

1.   A secondary space beyond the main space where smaller activities can take place, perhaps soundproofed for music lessons.

2.   Varied and plentiful storage. 3.   A kitchen with large area for washing up. 4.   Toilets, but children’s toilets not specifically needed. 5.   Outside space for play.

Lucy and the rest of the group were still liaising with parents and teachers, and visiting some other nurseries to get an idea of how some of these facilities looked in practice.

  11  

4.   Issues with fabric and facilities Andrew Childs summarised a range of issues that were ongoing issues with the Church Hall. These fell naturally into two categories – fabric of the building itself and the facilities contained within. The information was summarised on the diagram below in a non-technical fashion:

  12  

5.   Planning Constraints and Guidance Leading on from the previous group, Andrew Childs summarised some of the known planning constraints and guidance for the site. In this regard, the appeal had been helpful in giving an independent assessment and some of the comments below came from that report:

•   Proportion, height and siting were all significant factors in the dismissal of the last project and had to be borne in mind carefully with a new one in relation to both Elm Bank Gardens but also Thorne Passage.

•   Street impact and visual impact had also been negative grounds for dismissal. •   Safety and Parking had also been concerns, but car-free developments were possible. •   Noise had not been a major factor. •   Mixed use of the site was permitted. •   Floor space had been a question. The previous design with a slight reduction was not problematic in itself

in planning terms due to the improvement in facilities and better use of space. •   The materials of the previous development were considered appropriate to the situation.

All these factors would need to be taken into account with any new project.

6.   Funders and funding Jane Bennett-Powell led us in exploring a range of options related to funding which might include:

•   Fundraising events •   Grants (e.g. BWF, lottery) •   Commercial loans/trusts (e.g. Charities Aid Foundation) •   Diocesan Loans •   Congregation and community interest-free loans •   Gifts/donations

In the short discussion that followed, it was clear that probably all these sources would be needed, and we were likely to be looking at ¾ million if the experience of other church hall projects elsewhere and our own Community Centre were anything to go by. There was an awareness from all present, including those who might have preferred a refurbishment of the current building, that a new building was likely to be both less expensive and quicker to build, and therefore less disruptive to users and neighbours.

  13  

Concluding Session: Tea and Plenary Tea was served and there was a final session to wrap up and think what would happen next. The following was discussed:

•   There was much more information to be gathered by the various groups that would add to the information.

•   A report from today was needed to feedback widely. •   A community consultation which might have several stages through the process. •   A community meeting would be needed sometime in the Autumn so that the report could be digested.

Fr Stephen reminded all present where we were on the timeline process: We had completed part 1 which was to establish some grounding principles. We were currently in part 2 which was about gathering inputs. This would lead onto part 3 and the generation of a number of options for further consultation and discussion. The aim was to complete parts 2 and commence par 3 before the end of 2017 if at all possible.

The day finished with a time of silence and then by saying the Grace together:

The grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God,

and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with us all, evermore.

Amen.